One Postgame Take
When I was growing up as a Raiders fan, being pleased after a loss was unthinkable. However...Everything in context. Which is why, tonight, I have smile on my face.
The toughness and energy displayed tonight felt like fresh blood in the veins. I'd almost forgotten the feeling. Wow! Seymour, Bush, McFadden, Murphy, the offensive line...If Russell could have hit the broad side of a barn on half of his throws, and if the officials had not continued to perpetuate the biggest conspiracy this side of Roswell, the game would have been ours.
Sure, our defense broke down in the waning minutes (surprise!). But this was still a game to hang a hat on. This was a game that made the ESPN announcers nervous, their voices quivering as they tried to comprehend and cope with the reality of the Raiders smashing the mouths of their darling Chargers. This was a game played with vigor and intensity, focus and purpose. This was competitive football. In Oakland. In prime time. Long time coming.
This was ultimately game upon which hope can be built, and upon which momentum can be established. Don't hang your heads, Raiders. Job well done. Just make sure you close the deal next time.
The toughness and energy displayed tonight felt like fresh blood in the veins. I'd almost forgotten the feeling. Wow! Seymour, Bush, McFadden, Murphy, the offensive line...If Russell could have hit the broad side of a barn on half of his throws, and if the officials had not continued to perpetuate the biggest conspiracy this side of Roswell, the game would have been ours.
Sure, our defense broke down in the waning minutes (surprise!). But this was still a game to hang a hat on. This was a game that made the ESPN announcers nervous, their voices quivering as they tried to comprehend and cope with the reality of the Raiders smashing the mouths of their darling Chargers. This was a game played with vigor and intensity, focus and purpose. This was competitive football. In Oakland. In prime time. Long time coming.
This was ultimately game upon which hope can be built, and upon which momentum can be established. Don't hang your heads, Raiders. Job well done. Just make sure you close the deal next time.
posted by Raider Take at 10:47 PM
144 Comments:
Last few years I lose hope after the 1st quarter, at least after a loss I still have hope for the season.
AngelicRaider
They played well, refs, who says you can't blame the refs? How can that not be a catch, worst call since the "tuck bowl". Russell....UGH, he needs work, should of kept Garcia. Defense of line....proud of that group, linebackers..no need to go so deep on the prevent D, giving Sproles all that room, db's look fine...KO come on....plug your lanes. Running game looks great, pass protection was good, WR play, suspect..SCHILLENS where are you..Coaching was good except for the 2min clock management. This has been a problem with all our HC's...if this continues, we can make the playoffs.
JONES
PR....
I agree on all 4 points. We lost our edge towards the end of the game. Turnovers hurt us and ST play was horrible as well.
JaMarcus, I hope you get better as the season goes on. Cause right now his inconsistent play is not helping us. I still see a lot of mental mistakes and his accuracy is scary at times, like did he just do that or did he just do that? Hopefully Paul Hackett can help IMMEIDATELY.
The blown call is a pisser. We had this game won on all counts though we weren't crisp, but atleast we didn’t have our butts handed to us like in the Saints game.
LT you didn’t get your 100’s this time. And held them to less than 100 yds rushing combined. If we can do that all season long we can win some games on that count alone.
Seymour, welcome to Oakland. Pro Bowl # 6 here we come.
Kansas City here we come.
Great takes, Jones and Take. I agree entirely with both of you.
I saw a lot of opening night jitters, and a lack of rapport with the wideouts from J-Russ. He's definitely better than that. He was good with Miller and the short game, alright with Murphy, and bad with DHB and everybody else. They really need to work on that if Schilens is out for awhile. But now, I think I can be confident enough in the coaching staff to make sure that gets worked out.
Nobody likes to lose, but it is sure nice to watch competitive football again.
The refs left 4 points on the field. I thought the NFL believed the league is better when the Raiders win. Then why the bogus calls?... they seem to be getting worse and worse.
Despite Russell’s struggles, he showed the kind of poise that wins games. He wasn’t too rattled by his own inconsistency to throw a 57-yard TD on 4th down.
Unfortunately, Rob Ryan called in the last defensive sequence, because why else would the LBs drop back 10-12 yards off the LOS.
Richard Seymour was a pleasure to watch. The entire D was outstanding for, well, 58 minutes.
To Cable’s credit, he immediately acknowledged the D was playing too soft on the Chargers' TD drive, so perhaps the end of the prevent D is upon us.
Michael Huff, Tyvone Branch, Ricky Brown all had nice games on D. Cornell Green not so much on O (the Raiders should make a priority of finding his replacement).
Murphy got better as the game progressed. He’s no longer a rookie, he’s the Raiders’ leading WR. Makes one scratch their head even more... well, I won’t go there.
I hope this same team takes the field against KC and Denver. If so, I would expect the results to be slightly different.
Aside from Cornell Green (who was awful) and the obvious inexperience at WR, and half of Russell's incompletions, the team looked pretty good.
Having a young QB and rookie WRs is a terrible combination. Neither one can help the other over a rough patch, because neither one has really been there. I hope Schillens comes back soon, because we need help there.
And Green has got to go. He played at a Kwame harris level out there. I think he destroyed 2 drives by himself, and would have destroyed another if Murphy was sooooooo wide open on 4th down.
Loved the hitting and the fire on defense.
Storminator
i think it's worth noting that rob ryans defense played terrible on sunday.
we can now safely say that buddy and rex got the brains in the family, and rob got the nice hair.
as for the raiders, yes it was nice to see them resemble a football team for a change.
but i cannot blame this loss on the ref's, as bad as the ref's are.
it all came down to that last SD drive. stop them and we win. but we did not. case closed.
and i agree with NYRaider, cornell green is the only player that looks out of place.
he does not belong in the NFL.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Panty,
I think it's an hidden rule in the NFL that you are required to play prevent defense in the last five minutes with a lead. Way too many teams do it, we are not the only guilty ones.
Jones,
As for Garcia, he asked out. Guess he felt he should have been named the starter and got miffed when he wasn't.
Schillens has a broken foot, probably back game 3.
According to Steve Young a couple of the bad throws were rookie WR mistakes not cutting the pattern off correctly.
We actually did blitz a few times off the edge. Most were picked up by the fullback, so a little more work needed there on shedding the block.
And, just how strong is Richard Seymour. Double teamed and still got a handful of jersey to bring Rivers down. Rivers needs to be careful, some defensive player somewhere is going to be willing to take the big fine and one game suspension to shut the guy up.
I don't think Seymour is the guy he wants to be taunting. He has to face him again. Personally I'd pay good money to see a celebrity cage match between the two.
I normally dislike the three man talking head booth and last night was no exception, but kudos to Mike Golic (brother of Bob). At halftime he went to the replay official's boot for an explanation on the TD/NON-TD.
According to the official they made their decision based on the replay angle showing the back of the receiver.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but unless you have special x-ray video, how can you tell if the receiver is controlling the ball from his back? And, just because the ball moved doesn't mean he didn't have control. Aren't you supposed to tuck it away from the defender?
I agree the point of the ball struck the ground causing Murphy to lose it, but I thought the ground couldn't cause a fumble? Plus, if he had control when both feet contacted the ground, isn't the play over? He had broken the plane of the end zone.
Just asking folks, please show me where I'm wrong (except for faida guy).
The announcers were uniformly agreed it was a catch.
It is rumored the crew of official were wisked away on a black helicopter after the game to an undisclosed location to meet with Goodell for their bounus checks.
H
Nancy Gay has a completely different take on the Murphy TD/NON-TD. Who here is surprised?
H
I said it last night, and I'ma' say it again: The Chargers need to be prosecuted for receiving stolen property.
JMHSO
---Jeff
Hate to break it to you guys, but he did not catch the ball.
I thought it was a catch at first, looked like the ball just 'shifted' in his hand.
But after it shifted, it rolled out of his hand for a split second and he picked it up again.
People get the 'down by contact' rule confused with what constitutes a catch. This happens fairly often, but Murphy almost covered it up beautifully.
If I didn't have Tivo and wasn't able to just rewatch this replay, I would probably be saying we got screwed.
D looked good, but against a patchwork O-line. And if we loose CJ or Nnam, I think we're screwed.
On the bright side, the D should get better as the year goes on (baring injuries), as the new group gels.
The passing game is still the achiles heal. But looked much better with the protection.
my favorite stats:
O: 19 first downs
D: 77 rushing yards
-moshbucket
Moshbucket -
The refs only had a back view of the play that H described. Apparently, they didn't have the advantage of the front view we all saw and you Tivo'd. Based on that, the call on the field should have stood.
Nahhh, that was a catch....how long do you have to have it in control before you can touch the ball on the ground? He had it in control the whole way to the ground...includes in the air, 2 feet on the ground..ass and legs hit the ground and then the ball touches...IT WAS A CATCH..how anyone can say it isn't...don't know a damn thing or they just hate the Raiders.
JONES
Arkansas,
Maybe they should really be prostituded, then they could earn their money.
Antonio Gates was very complimentary to the defense. He insinuated they were lucky to get out of there with a win.
We get our second crack at them in week 8.
Moshbucket,
I will review it again to insure I heard and saw correctly, but the decision to review came from the booth, just as the Snow Job did, and I guarantee you if it happens to the Patsies, the Midgets or even the Dolts, it will be ruled a TD, and probably won’t even be reviewed. And, if it is true the definitive view the refs looked at was the back view, you couldn’t see his hands to see if he was controlling the ball. That’s my point. All you could see was the point of the ball, no hands. There are too many convoluted rules that conflict with each other.
If you break the plane of the end zone and lose control afterwards it’s a TD. Unless you’re a receiver with both feet down, your butt down and on your way to the ground. That call was just as crucial to the game as Russell’s first interception.
Next two opponents:
Chefs were lucky they only lost by 14 and the Geldings were outplay by the Striped Kittens but got their miracle. For bulletin board material the KC papers are saying the Chefs best chance for victory in their next five games is this Sunday.
H
This comment has been removed by the author.
Panty,
It was in the last two minutes, so the call for review had to come from the booth.
H
That loss sucked. I am still pissed off. I wish I could share the good feeling around here, but we MUST win this week or else it could get ugly fast.
I remember Norv's first 4 games of the season the last being against KC. We lost a couple of heart breakers and it ultimately killed the season.
Losing last second games like this can seriously deflate the team. I guess we will find out about their heart sooner rather than later.
Roy
I kept thinking over and over last night that we have a team very very close to being REALLY good. Not just 8-8 good, but 10-6 good IMO.. now all we need is a frigging DC with an actual pair of balls, Barnes and Schilens to return so two people that shouldn't even be in the NFL (Green and Heyward/Bey) can take their respected places on the bench, and Russell to find some consistency.
Time to kick some KC ass!!
For me, the operative word for this game is ENERGY. As in, we actually had some.
Bodies were flying, hits were being made, and passion was in the air. Losing is unpleasant. But lacking competitive energy and effort is a sin, one that the Raiders have committed with startling frequency in recent years.
Last night, the Raiders were not sinners. This is football I can watch and respect.
Heck, even Michael Huff looked kind of tough.
Roy,
Which sucks more, this one or 28-0.
H
Roy
Main thing is..we see progress..
Russell is way behind in his development , can't throw on the run, can't see the whole field, with all day to throw. This team could be a playoff team IF we get good QB play. Russell isn't inspiring confidence, he held the O back last night. Defense, up front pressure is what AD's defense needs, he got it last night.
Rivers was whining near the end of the game and it is ONLY WEEK 1.
If this Dline plays 16 games as inspired as they were last night....this defense will be good. The offense let down the defense in the 2nd half. They got gassed, on the field too much and the usual "prevent" causes another prevent of winning.
It's something to build on, haven't seen another team look beat down like S.D. did near the end of the game....Raiders were beating them down all game, that was great to see.
Just need better QB play and KO coverage...get the ball to McFadden, looked like he was made of rubber the way S.D players were bouncing off him.
I enjoyed the game, a competitive team is all we ask for, a team that can win every week...keep it going.
JONES
H,
To be totally honest, I am not sure what is a worse way to lose. The roller coaster of emotions is tough for me to deal with. If--and this is a big IF--we can build off of that loss immediately...who knows.
And this my friends is the most frustrating part of the loss. I am being sucked back in...I had written off this season but now, my mind is racing with possibilities. If we lose this week I will be crushed.
I say it every year, I feel like Charlie Brown racing towards the football. Lucy (the Raiders) is promising she won't move the ball and I am believing her...Please don't move the ball. PLEASE!
Roy
By the way, were those throwback uniforms sweet or what!?
The catch was a catch. Two rules are involved here. It was touchdown when Murphy had control and his second foot hit the ground. It's a touchdown at THAT point, so what happened after didn't count. Also, when the ball hit the ground, Murphy still had control. The ball can touch the ground, and as long as you haven't lost control of it, it's a catch.
They hosed Higgins as well. He had a first down catch inside field goal range, got both feet down, and then went to the ground. The ball didn't come out until he hit the ground.
I liked the work of Steve Young. He's always been a class act. I always liked him better than Montana, who's kind of an ass.
Wow, Seymour... I told you it was good trade. I also predicted how they'd use him.
I couldn't quite understand why Russell was so far off target on many of his throws. WRs taking the wrong cut is a good explanation. I also had the impression that he panicked a bit when he'd realize that he was holding the ball forever (how about that O-line protection?) and figured he was about to get hit soon, and just threw it where nobody would catch it.
Green sucked. I hope Kalif Barnes is ready soon, so they can test him at RT.
But the long and the short of it is the Raiders just shut down one of the best rushing attacks in football. Rob Ryan, on the other hand, couldn't stop the run on Sunday to save his life.
I really like where we are right now. But we can do better. Let's close the deal against both KC and Denver.
Take,
Yeah, makes me want to get some throwback gear. Something that looks as old as me.
Roy,
This team fought to the end. I watched some of the Chefs' game. The emotion level came nowhere near what I saw last night. They gave up 198 rushing yards and only generated 29 and were almost minus 20 minutes in time of possession.
It was only close because of a Titmouse turnover and a punt return for a TD.
Does that guarantee a win, no, but I like our chances.
H
The throw back unis were great, but I wish we'd used the black jerseys at home. The only reason I guess we didn't was because we are using them twice this year. The other game is against the Cowboys who always go with white at home. Davis is particularly fond of the white throwbacks because he designed them. Against the Cowboys we'll have to wear black.
I think the main reason many of us are Raider fans is their history of last second victories. Being treated to last second victories means that you occasionally have to endure the last second losses. It also means that the team will have to overcome the last second losses on the way to becoming a team capable of last second victories. I hope that makes sense.
"This is football I can watch and respect."
I'm with you on that one, RT. We all want W's. If the Raiders keep up the effort they displayed last night the W's will start to come. There is room for improvement-- specifically STs and protecting the foot ball.
Overall, I'm encouraged. Seymour said he was encourage. Even Gates said this Raider team was different than the past few years- they were playing to win.
Playing to win. Imagine that!
Good to be back.
JF
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Just watched the replay of the TD taken off the board... once again, isn't there supposed to be INDISPUTABLE evidence to overturn? He caught the ball, had possession of it, hit the ground... the ball hit the ground while he STILL had possession of it.. and then bobbled out as he was trying to get up.
At least thats how I saw it.
Green also took at least 3 points off the board with his false start on third and short right before Jruss's interception... gawd that guy is a train wreck. Bey should clearly not be starting... and the prevent on third and 13 cost us the game.
We DO have to start winning these games... especially as hard as they played. But I don't know if I can handle a DC that is too scared to blitz when the game is on the line very much longer. Isn't five years of watching it long enough???
As for the defense, The Dline is looking like it will be solid. Can we please get a linebacker to blitz every once in a while so that we arent predictable. PLease throw in a wrinkle.
To get beat underneath on that last drive........
Corners are looking like a real strenght,although chargers last touchdown from tv angle looked like Routt should have deflected or even intercepted the pass. which leads me to safeties, no glaring mistakes no super plays. In all the defense played this game with intensity, delivered wood, bent then finally broke in that last drive of the game. If the defense improves on this game,,,,I can see a top ten defense, or am I seeing through silver and black glasses?
SCAR
As for the defense, The Dline is looking like it will be solid. Can we please get a linebacker to blitz every once in a while so that we arent predictable. PLease throw in a wrinkle.
To get beat underneath on that last drive........
Corners are looking like a real strenght,although chargers last touchdown from tv angle looked like Routt should have deflected or even intercepted the pass. which leads me to safeties, no glaring mistakes no super plays. In all the defense played this game with intensity, delivered wood, bent then finally broke in that last drive of the game. If the defense improves on this game,,,,I can see a top ten defense, or am I seeing through silver and black glasses?
SCAR
I just took a look at the overturned Touchdown. To Nancy Gay's dismay, this is why the play was badly called.
The rule says "going to the ground in the act of catching the football..." This presupposes that there is no completion until he hits the ground. In other words, he's attempting to bring the ball in on the way the ground, but loses control when hitting the ground.
The fact is that Murphy had possession of the ball, and had broken the plain of the goal line. When his second foot hits the ground, it is by rule, then, a TD. (Compare this to going out of bounds in the end-zone, where both feet have to touch inside the end-zone whether he's falling down or not.) At no time was he attempting to gain control, because he already had it before his feet hit, and only needed his feet to touch down for the score.
At the time Murphy lost control of the ball, it was already a touchdown.
The thing about the D playing with such high energy ("bodies flying"), they were also disciplined. Players seemed to stay in their assignments. I noticed a couple times when Rivers rolled out (as if to run), someone was right there to contain him. It was really inspiring.
The game film has to show Cable and Marshall the mistake they made allowing the LBs to drop back on the last drive.
The Chargers' line was injured (face it, we punched them in the mouth the whole game) and instead of blitzing and forcing the issue, we dropped back and let Rivers dictate the action. And this D wasn't like last year in Buffalo when they were just tired. These guys played hard to the end.
Anyone notice Brown playing in the middle? He seemed to be calling the signals and directing traffic. And everybody helped Seymour in his assignments (like he needed help).
I expected them to wear black at home, but the white throwbacks rock.
Gary, I don't think their failure to blitz late in the game caused the loss. That doesn't mean they played the end game well.
The book on Rivers is that he can beat you on the blitz. Some QBs are very good with the blitz, and would actually prefer that you did. Rivers is one of those.
The mistake the Raiders made was playing their coverage too softly. They gave SD receivers far too much room. The Raider DBs are good enough where they can play tight coverage without getting burned, but DC Marshall did not display faith enough in them to do that.
Cable apparently agrees and will adjust.
>>>
Gary, I don't think their failure to blitz late in the game caused the loss. That doesn't mean they played the end game well.
The book on Rivers is that he can beat you on the blitz. Some QBs are very good with the blitz, and would actually prefer that you did. Rivers is one of those.
>>>>
Hmm... I dunno. A friend just texted me that Rivers just said he only saw more than four rushers TWICE the entire game.
Even SOB isn't that conservative.
I kept thinking SOB would change and he never did.
Hopefully this isn't true with Marshall. Isn't one of the keys to football is being unpredictable?
That said, he does deserve kudos for improving the teams tackling and staying on assignment. Its like night and day different than SOB.
Now just a blitz on third in long every once in awhile please??? lol
On the key play in the last drive Sproles was wide open over the middle. Now, he may have still caught the ball, but he would have had a harder time picking the first down except that when changing directions to come back to cover Sproles one LB slipped and hit the ground, and another lost his footing and was slowed in his change of direction.
Might not have made any difference but there was a little bit of bad luck there. I'll check the tape, but I think it was third and long at the time.
H
>>>
The rule says "going to the ground in the act of catching the football..." This presupposes that there is no completion until he hits the ground. In other words, he's attempting to bring the ball in on the way the ground, but loses control when hitting the ground.
>>>
THATS IT! Something didn't sit well about this when I was reading the rule, and this clarifies it for me.
The rule is addressing when a receiver doesn't have possession of the ball as he was coming down.
HE DID.
If he was still juggling it before he had two feet down and falling, yes, it was a fumble. He already had possession, so it doesn't matter what happens anyway.
Crazy.
The NFL won't admit wrong on this either... we learned this in the tuck game... which is where the true "Raider rules" come into play. "Never admit the Raiders got fucked" is the "Raider rule".
Speaking of tackling the Dolts have that 300 pound TE. He caught a pass and, I believe it was Branch, made a textbook tackle. Wrapped the guy up and put him on the ground.
H
Well analyzed Blanda. The problem with replay (as we saw in Tuck and in many other instances) it gives the officials the opportunity to mis-interpret rules or re-interpret rules. Looking at these replays not in real time allows over-scrutinization of the play. There should be some sought of governing body at a game that would step in and say no- you got the interpretation totally wrong "That should be a touchdown". Alas these mis-interpretations never seem to go in our favor. Funny, aint it?
Raidermike
again i say, yes the refs are horrible.
they have screwed the raiders over the years many times, and there is no one that will stop it.
i wouldn't be surprised to see it happen many more times this season.
the league has no shame in this regard.
but the point is, if our defense stops SD on their last drive, we win the game.
we have the talent to overcome the corrupt NFL officials.
but we must make the big plays in the 4th quarter with the game on the line.
You have to look at the rules for completing a pass, because the player does not have possesion until it is a completed pass.
It doesn't matter if you break the plane if you do not possess the ball yet.
Think of it like this. We all understand the concept of "The ground can't cause a fumble". Well, the ground CAN cause an incomplete.
If the guy doesn't 'come up with the ball', it's not complete. I used to think in this case if the ball touches the ground at all it's incomplete, but they seem to rule it a catch if you can see the receiver has control and the ball 'touches' the ground.
In our case Murphy caught it, kind of belly flopped on it, and from the initial views looked like he had it in his hand it it just moved in his had some. As he was getting off the ground onto his knees, the ball bobbled between his legs, hit the ground and he snatched it up quick.
A few years ago someone caught a TD in traffic and in same motion almost, he caught it and spun it on the ground as he was standing up. The called it incomplete.
As long as he is learning from the mistakes (Murphy addmitted he was already thinking of his celebration when it slipped out).
You can hate the rule, but it's the rule. It probably does have some ambiguety in it's wording about 'comming down with the ball' and stuff, ala. "bringing the ball back down towards his body". That's what brady was doing when woodson hit him, bringing the ball back down towards his body", WTF is that! He
s holding the ball next to his F-ing ear! Sorry, they put 'em in Pengiun outfits last year, but they're still just stinking zebras, and that's the first thing that always comes to mind when I see strips.
-moshbucket
My impression of our D is that we are only on the cusp of becoming an elite, dynamic unit.
When DC Marshall says "no" to prevent D, starts tinkering with blitz pressure and maximizing Seymour's versatility, look the F out.
Our D was ...
- flying to the ball
- maintaing gaps
- collapsing the pocket
- playing sticky M2M coverage
- wrapping up ball carriers
- initiating 1st contact
- aggressive yet sound
The Russell to Murphy combination gives me hope. DHB looks lost and unsure of himself in terms of routes and his hands.
Besides Seymour's individual play, the biggest impact that I saw last night is his ability to raise his teammates game to another level by versatility, leadership, and most of all, his inspiring play.
So this is what it feels like for a football fan to have genuine hope, huh? It is amazing how a rejuvenated D raises our collective competitive spirit.
Hope is good and all, but that was still a crushing, disappointing defeat in a game that the Raiders had.
Just needed to keep them from going 89 yards at the end. The defense had em where they wanted them and failed. Marshall's calls were a huge disappointment.
About the call: I think everyone covered why it was horrendous pretty well, with the exception of moshbucket.
Yeah, he lost control of the ball....when he was getting up to celebrate. How long do you have to control the ball, for God's sake? All the way into the Black Hole leap?
The botched call on Murphy's TD can be debated, analyzed, and reconstructed til your blue in the face. I personally believe that it was a TD due to having control of the ball AFTER 2 feet were down. However, when push comes to shove, this game was lost for 3 primary reasons:
(1) Piss poor Kick Off coverage that led to unearned/easy points.
(2) Turnovers that either took potential points off the board or gave SD a short field.
(3) Playing soft, zone coverage, prevent D with the game on the line.
>>>
How long do you have to control the ball, for God's sake?
>>>>
THATS THE WHOLE POINT! He had control of the ball even after the ball hit the ground... it didn't slip out until a split second later.
So basically what we have here is the NFL saying a rusher can OBVIOUSLY fumble the ball and it is still a TD as long as he breaks the plane of the endzone before he fumbles it, but a receiver doesn't get to score a TD even after me maintains control of the ball after hitting the ground with it?
Its a moronic rule no matter how you spin it... even worse than the tuck rule. No way that gets turned over if Tom Brady threw it.
>>>
(1) Piss poor Kick Off coverage that led to unearned/easy points.
(2) Turnovers that either took potential points off the board or gave SD a short field.
(3) Playing soft, zone coverage, prevent D with the game on the line.
>>>
I agree 100% with this, and a championship team should overcome these things, but gawd fukin dammit we are just a team trying to crawl back to respectability... there's no reason we need to keep having the refs shove a shiv up our ass every time we get close to doing it.
Watch to see how many times that call gets made again in the NFL this year... my guess is none.
Cable: “That’s coaching, in being confident how we’re going to close it out. It’s almost like we got into a prevent mode rather than just continuing to play defense.”
Almost?
Honestly, what's it going to take for a Raiders defensive coach to try something different in that situation? Haven't they seen, say, I don't know, THE PAST 20 YEARS OF RAIDERS FOOTBALL in those situations? Heck, even when we were a winning team, we were losing games this way.
AHHHH!!!!
>>>
Honestly, what's it going to take for a Raiders defensive coach to try something different in that situation? Haven't they seen, say, I don't know, THE PAST 20 YEARS OF RAIDERS FOOTBALL in those situations?
>>>
The Raiders teams of old blitzed like crazy... sorry.
I've posted proof before somewhere... I can repost it if you don't believe me.
1999 Raiders had 12 non-interior lineman sacks.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/rai/1999.htm
How did that happen without blitzing?
2000 had 8... didn't click on anything after that.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Excellent article on how replay (how it is currently employed in the NFL) does more harm than good.
http://www.insidebayarea.com/raiders/ci_13344732
RaiderMike
Moshbucket,
So if you catch a pass, land on your stomach and chest then use both hands to push yourself up, it’s incomplete? How stupid is that. I’d be willing to wager the scenario above has happened dozens if not hundreds of times over the years. I’d also be willing to wager that exact scenario that occurred on Monday has been called a TD dozens if not hundreds of times over the years since instant replay was instituted.
Calico,
Kickoff coverage and turnovers. I agree, but then we get into the old tired argument that blown calls by officials have “nothing” to do with the outcome of games as put forward by the league office a couple of years ago. In each case we overcame the turnovers by stopping the Dolts.
I’m not saying the call cost us the game. I’m saying it took away a chance to win the game either by a long field goal or in overtime. With that I’m putting it down; it’s now between Alameda and the league office.
Take,
“I don't know, THE PAST 20 YEARS OF RAIDERS FOOTBALL in those situations”.
Well Take, it ain’t just us. It’s a league wide thing, hence the colloquialism “The only thing a prevent defense does is prevent you from winning the game.” I say dance with who brung ya; die with your boots on; and several other exciting phrases. I think it’s a hidden rule to generate more “thrilling” finishes and comebacks for TV (How’s that for a conspiracy).
H
Gary- I agree more blitz packages would be nice but in the last game we were pretty much collapsing the pocket all game and forcing Rivers to dramatically shorten up his passing game. We should have tightened things up in the box. Rivers is not a good guy to blitz a whole lot-- but I agree we could have brought the house a couple of times anyway. Lets see if this was the rule of this game or our philosophy for the season. Don't panic yet.
RaiderMike
Raider Mike,
It's a good one.
I know I said I'd put it down, but something popped into my head while reading it.
If Murphy not controlling it after hitting the ground is the issue, that was discernable in real time. He used his right hand to catch and control the ball and to push himself up.
H
Bama7
If you watched the game on espn then you heard Steve Young make several cvomments that our defense is really an old, base defense that is really only using a "we'll line up and each of us will physically beat the man in front of us" scheme. Young said that any well-run offense will beat that defense every time if it executes correctly (see last drive of game). It does not matter who our DC is. We run the same antiquated defense every year. every year. Did anyone really think we'd stop the Chargers when they had to score? One difference Monday night is that Seymour actually is better than most anyone in front of him on any given night, so that helps Al's macho defensive scheme. I don't think we play many offensive jaugernauts this year so that helps too, but if we ever got to the playoffs we would not stop a good, well-run offense that is clicking.
Only other points I have is that DHB, as advertised, has trouble catching the football... not a good trait for a WR.
And lastly, our environment is not a good one for developing a QB. Russell's maturation will be extremely slow and that is not his fault. Young had excellent critique on him all night... and he is making many, meny errors that go back to coaching.
The lack of blitzing wasn't much of a problem because we were getting pressure all night.
The lack of adjustment to the RB passes on the last drive was inexcusable. Did any of us think that was going to stop happening as long as he kept getting open? No? Then why didn't it occur to the coaches?
Storminator
Gary, whether or not the Raiders blitzed in the past, they have done lot of folding in the final minutes over the years with this "prevent" business.
Quote from Cable:
"If you had that play happen 20 times this season, 19 of them would be touchdowns. If you go to the replay booth, it’s supposed to be absolute evidence that it needs to be overturned. When you spend that much time in the booth, obviously, it wasn’t that obvious."
Correct on all counts.
H
H,
I agree it's stupid.
I re-read what was posted in an article where the ref read from the rule, and the problem is like the tuck rule, it doesn't really clarify what constitues on the ground and more importantly, when CAN the ball be released? Do you have to hold onto the ball all the way to the ref?. The rule just says you must maintain control "after you go to the ground". Just like "..while pulling the ball down towards his body".
Slow-mo makes it more agrivating, because in slowmo, it looks like an obvious catch. But then you have to factor in the BS rules they are to lazy to fix. They never even addressed the tuck rule. I mean you don't have to get rid of it, but clarrify f-ing "bringing the ball back down towards his body", that makes NO sense when qb's are pumpfaking it hand holding it up by thier heads.
Same goes for this rule, because it says you have to maintain control after you hit the ground.... UNTIL WHEN? By this rule, when the player hands the ball to the ref, he is loosing control after he hits the ground right???
Point is, he caught the ball, and was screwed by a technicality. I've seen this rulling several times in the past, and will continue to see it in the future.
Hopefully the next time it goes in our favor, but don't hold your breath for one of those great apology letters.
-moshbucket
Moshbucket,
Good points. If my butt is on the ground, am I not on the ground at that point? And, as I roll over my knee touches, am I not down by contact at that point? Food for thought, looks like I lied about not talking about it anymore, so I withdraw my statement.
Bama,
If Seymour was the only difference Monday then all the Dolts had to do was double team him, and the D would fold like a house of cards from the opening play. What you conveniently left out was Golic and Young talking about players filling their gaps, not leaving their assignments and trusting their teammates to do their job. You also left out the physical hits being passed out by safeties and CB’s, something you have complained mightily about in the pass along with proper tackling.
Monday was the first step in rebuilding the defense. A very good first step. It was lights out better than we saw under SOB (and let us not go down that road again, he’s gone and his defense gave up 225 rushing to the Horned Norsemen).
From a fan standpoint Monday was encouraging. Being a coach is totally different. Quote from Cable:
"That's all fine and dandy, but at the end of the day we didn't get it done at the end, and that's the next step. I think we really tasted it. Certainly going into this thing our expectations are high and they should be, but now we have to learn how to close out and win those close games."
Thus far Cable has delivered on his assessments, we will now see if he can deliver on that one.
Now, there are still questions about Russell’ s heart and leadership. The guy is quiet and reserved in public. But, on the field he is developing. He was a bit upset at first himself then his rookie receivers on some of the throws and drops and showed so. However, I would like to point to the end around ran in the second half. Once he pitched the ball to the receiver he then went downfield, blocked one DB pushing him out of bounds then took on another. He threw two blocks on the play.
A lot of QB’s toss the ball then get out of the way.
Also, Hackett now has actual full game observation and film to work with since he took over as QB coach. The next month should be interesting, especially with the way Murphy played late in the game and when Schilens gets back. We didn’t run the ball as good in the second half because of the problems passing. It got better when they got Zach Miller back in the passing game in the second half. He should be an option on virtually every pass play. Hell, put him in the slot and let some nickel back cover him.
H
Something we did an excellent job of, that we have sucked rocks at in the past, was diagnose and blow up screen plays. I was very heartened to see that.
Storminator
I love how every Raiders’ coach (in every game it's an issue) looks at the prevent defense like it's a new problem. Hell, SOB was so in denial, he refused to call it a prevent D.
What ever happened to turning it up a notch, as opposed to dialing it down?
Up by 3 points with the Chargers on their own 11 and just over 2 minutes left, it's time to rally the D and unleash the dogs of war!
The Raiders actually tried to disguise the soft coverage by lining up in the box and dropping back at the snap. In the process, at least one LB stumbled while backpedaling into position. Then, even after it became apparent the Chargers were exploiting the D formation, the Raiders didn’t change the call.
NYRaider,
"I love how every Raiders’ coach (in every game it's an issue) looks at the prevent defense like it's a new problem"
Like I said earlier, it ain't just us. It's a league wide thing that fans of a lot of teams just don't understand.
H
"(Bama) If Seymour was the only difference Monday then all the Dolts had to do was double team him, and the D would fold like a house of cards from the opening play."
They did dbl-team him... and he still made plays. Apparently, he's that good.
Clearly, Seymour brought an intangible to the Raiders' D which allowed everyone to play better.
However, it seems that the prevent D will continue to haunt us until we can blow out our opponents.
I just can't understand what's wrong with looking at every D series as though we're down by a TD, regardless of the actual score. Isn't that the way to play defense... always looking to shut down the opponent?
For those saying that a 4 man pressure front system is antique, look at the Titans, Giants, Colts, Saints, Vikings, and Steelers please. Yes, they utilize the blitz (probably more than the Raiders, and mostly on running plays); but if you watched the Titans-Steelers game, the majority of their pressure came from a 4-man front.
It is not an antique system. The Raiders' problem was revealed on Monday Night, they abandon this system for a soft cover (prevent)when the game is on the line, and we have a lead, and the opponent has a long way to go. Had the Raiders continued their aggressive defensive attack (as they had up to that point), they would have won the game.
It's not the system, it's how you utilize it. If the coaches continue to utilize this system aggressively like they did on Monday Night, for the whole game, then wins will come. If we fall into a "prevent" with the game on the line, we will lose everytime, unless we are up by 20+.
The problem on the last drive wasn't a lack of pressure from the front 4; it was the soft coverage by the Linebackers and Corners. Take away that cushion, win the ball game by either stopping them, or creating an Interception.
NYRaider,
You made my point. They didn't fold. In fact the much maligned Huff made the interception AND the fumble recovery.
Now, lets straighten out that prevent thing.
Besides, say we did play tight and they did break one. Stuff happens. Well, we would have at least had more than 18 seconds left to mount our comeback. The prevent defense also allows the opponent to dictate clock management.
H
>>>>
Besides, say we did play tight and they did break one. Stuff happens. Well, we would have at least had more than 18 seconds left to mount our comeback. The prevent defense also allows the opponent to dictate clock management.
>>>>
I said this last year (and caught hell for it) I'd much rather give up one long play than those agonizing 8 - 12 minute drives.
Not sure why every DC the Raiders have had since Bresnahan and Shaw is so terrified of giving up long pass plays.
Lack of coconuts IMO.
I love how Florio says that by Cable admitting that they should not have gone to a prevent defense that it might "make fans angry." Fans hate prevent defense. Fans already know it does not work. It already makes fans angry. I've been reading it here for the past 2yrs.
As for the Murphy non-TD: In the Buf-NE game there was a similar circumstance in the 4th quarter when the NE WR caught the ball in the endzone, fell, the ball hit the ground, but he maintained possession. It was called a TD on the field, the ref reviewed it and the call on the field was upheld. It was very similar to Murphy's catch. The difference was the interpretation of the ref. The ref for the raiders perceived the ball hitting the ground as losing possession. The NE ref did not. That is the human aspect of the game.
JF
this was a pisser of a game. defense is lookin' much better. re: russell. as i said, i reserve my criticism of him until perhaps mid-season.
that WAS a TD!
guys, i'm heading to cancun with the wife so i'll miss 2 games.
isn't it amazing how the so-called experts predict the raiders to be DEAD LAST in their division? don't they know how much crappier the chiefs and the donks (and their terible d) not to far behind them? i'm pretty confident we'll win BOTH games. mark that down. in fact, i won't even bother recording the chief game!
go RAIDERS!
You know what would be really nice? It would be really nice if just once we could be up by 14 with 2 minutes left so we could play prevent without having to stress over it!
Look, I'm going to start off by stating that, bad call or not, the raiders still put themselves in a position to win that game and have nothing but their soft defense on the last drive to thank for their loss. You see it ALL the time, a team is so afraid to get beat deep that they give teams anything they want short and the good teams (especially the ones with Darren Sproles) are going to take advantage of that every time.
But I'd also like to say this, I love the NFL, football is by far my favorite sport but the thing I absolutely HATE about this league is the undeniable fact that things like perception, and standings, and the name on the back of your jersey DRASTICALLY effect the way these games are officiated. Close your eyes and try to imagine that touchdown to Murphy being overturned had it been say, Rothlesberger to Ward, or Brady to Moss; wait, stop laughing and try to imagine it!!
NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS. You know it, I know it, even yellow dog knows it.
Some may argue that winning teams have earned that kind of "benefit of the doubt" type treatment but that's absolute bullshit. Every team deserves a game officiated fairly and with common sense.
I felt so insulted that they even reviewed that play, let alone overturned it. Guess you can't have those "Super Bowl Bound" San Diego Chargers in trouble at the half.
Like I said, the Raiders should have won the game despite all of this, and I guess I should decide to view that as a positive, but plays like that overturned call make you feel like the climb out of this six year hole is just going to be that much harder when the deck is stacked against this team before they even take the field.
What's funny is that when Murphy's play went to review, I never gave it a second thought. TD!
That's funny (haha) because it's pretty much the same feeling I had when the fumble went to review during the "tuck" game. Fumble!
Some things just couldn't be more obvious, yet....
Everyone is wondering why our defense plays the way it does late in the game...got 2 words for you ..AL DAVIS. HE calls that defense and the coaches don't adjust UNLESS AD calls down and tells them to. You all think I'm nuts, but this is the TRUTH. I love that word....the defense we are running is the same defense as last year and the year before......BUT, when Al Davis' defense has a dominant front 4, it does work UNTIL we go into the "prevent". ....Saw it so many times in the 90's and late 80's, drives me nuts. Rivers eyes probably went real big, AFC west knows what the Raiders will always do late in the game.
Steve Young was making my buddy crack up when he kept on saying the Raiders are still playing a basic defense from the 80's. Thing I told him was the front 4, if they get pressure, now AD's defense has the advantage, Seymour and Ellis look like very good additions at this point.
GET McFADDEN THE BALL, use him out of the backfield. Let him be like a Westbrook or Marshall Faulk, he has good hands and is dangerous in the open field. Don't put the game into Russell's hands to win. Rb's and TE, then throw long.
JONES
I think we've pretty much shown here that the TD was a TD even in the rule book. What the Ref called was regarding plays where the receiver has not yet established possession when going down. As soon as Murphy touched his second foot to the ground, it was a TD and what happened afterward was irrelevant.
That said, what I like about Cable is he came right out and said that the Raiders should not have been playing prevent in that situation, especially when the defense had the game under control from the beginning. Cable said we have to be who we are, but we don't have to be predictable. He seemed to promise that from now on we'd be more aggressive. Halolujah!
If Moss, Owens or Fitzgerald would have been in that TD "drop" would it had been called a catch or a dropped ball?
When Moss was with us how many times did he get called for offensive pass interference? How many times has he gotten called for OPI with the Patsies? Has he changed his style of play?
Our players are young and eventually will be the elite of the NFL and we'll still be getting those stupid calls from the nfl.
Russell sucks!!!!!!!!
Well said Mad Stork 83.
Gary and Jones,
How many times do I have to say this? It AIN'T just us. It's a league wide thing. Problem is we do it with a 3 point lead. It’s one of the oldest complaints in football. The only thing the prevent defense prevents is winning the game.
Buffalo did it with a two possession lead, then fumbled the kickoff. The Patsies won, Brady got all the credit, no one mentioned the guy who forced the fumble. Brady, Brady, Brady, Yada, Yada, Yada. Let the fawning begin. Swap Brady for Matt Stafford over in Motown and let's see how many big comebacks he engineers.
At least with a two possession lead you force them to use the clock.
As for Cable's statement making fans angry, I say just the opposite. We are glad he sees it. Now, if he doesn’t adjust it, then get angry.
H
Jones said;
The way we used our base 4 on D for the last drive of the game was fine. The base 4 did an excellent job throughout the game collapsing the pocket and getting pressure.
The bone I have to pick is how the LBs were used on the last 2 drives.
If the LBs are in the box, the short stuff underneath isn't there and/or the LB is in position to make a tackle for a short gain.
Even with a good base 4, I still would like to see more selective blitzing to keep the opponent on his back heels.
The scheme we ran was perfectly sound and executed for the first 45 minutes. It wasn't until the 4th quarter that we started dropping LBs out of the box.
The best coaches in the NFL understand the critical importance of being able to learn from their mistakes and make timely adjustments.
Let's hope that Cable makes the adjustment of eliminating the prevent D. One of the worst traits of the prevent D is that it essentially neuters the defenders and takes away their natural aggression. It is a mental switch that tells the defender "GO ahead and dial it down a notch ... play it safe ... we are playing not to lose".
The Raiders take it to the extreme. It's been going on for a long time and it is a trait that Cable has mentioned. Now, let's see how the ole man reacts as the season progresses. Cable says it's a problem, AD doesn't give in so easy. We have a showdown a brewin. Cable knows what AD likes, should be interesting.
H,
Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with actual physics or reality (I caught the ball and landed safely), it's about the fantasy world of the NFL rulebook (I touched the ball with both hands and now must satisfy rule X, Y, and Z, plus rule D subparts 1 and 5, and sometimes Y. Then the magic Zebra may or may not decide to grant you with a completion)
I think Monty Python might have been involved in writing it.
Blanda,
I thought I heard or read one of the Zebras say that if the defender makes contact with the receiver before the receiver has both feet on the ground, then the play is considered going to the ground. So if you contact the guy before he has both feet down, then both feet down no longer guarantees posession. Now the receiver has to go to the ground with it and maintain posession.
I'm about to watch the Zebras on nfl total access, and they're supposed to explain the call.
-moshbucket
They explained it like I originally understood it, but you don't have to have a defender involved.
If you catch it in the air and you go to the ground when you land, you have to maintain control of the ball when you hit the ground.
And you basically have to get up with it.
The replays obviously show the ball on the ground as he's trying to pull it out from underneath himself.
moshbucket
Moshbucket:
Simple questions:
What constitutes possession and control of the ball?
How long does the player need to demonstrate possession and control of the ball?
After maintaining control & possesion of the ball after having 2 feet down, how can the ground itself cause an incompletion?
As I understand the VERY basic nature of a catch, it is the following;
Having both feet down on the playing field while having the ball securely in place.
It can be secured in 1 hand, 1 hand pressed against the body, both hands on the ball, both hands with the ball pressed against the body.
The ball itself can move as long as it it is being clearly controlled by the WR.
Murphy had complete control of the ball, complete possession of the ball AFTER both feet were squarely on the playing surface.
This whole notion of having to have the ball secured when you get up or having to control the ball after you hit the ground goes against common sense WHEN you have already established complete control/possession of the ball with both feet down.
Sorry but I'm not buying what you are selling.
If the same play happened to Vincent Jackson I would be the 1st to say he got robbed.
As a matter of fact, the exact same play happened with Pats TE Watson earlier in the evening yet it was 'interpreted' differently.
Inside the NFL, Warren Sapp, he said it all, the faidas are the WORSE in the league, the other teams he has rated higher than the faidas. Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, Kansas City......These are the 5 bottom dwellers with the faidas at number 32, Just cry babies, because you know it's true! 0-16, I'm trying to save you money. I love the faida "nation"
hey, remember last year when the dolts were robbed up in denver ?
remember the reaction ?
ed hakuli apologized. he was near tears.
the bspn crew was up in arms. how could this happen ?!!!
the league began an investigation. heads would roll.
they even admitted it was a bad call.
quite a different reaction all the way around when it's the raiders getting screwed.
hey, no big deal. it's just the raiders. let's all move on.
wow, talk about corruption.
Moshbucket,
“I think Monty Python might have been involved in writing it.” Probably John Cleese. He tended t play the lawyers and bureaucrats. Think Ministry of Silly Walks (what constitutes a silly walk).
“So if you contact the guy before he has both feet down, then both feet down no longer guarantees posession. Now the receiver has to go to the ground with it and maintain posession.” Prime example.
Calico,
Common sense got nothing to do with it. See above.
Raider00,
Ed Hakuli is still officiating. He still has long conferences after each flag, pushes players out of his camera field of view and I think his shirts are even tighter this year.
On the radio this morning Chris Mortensen (yeah, I know), said the ground can’t cause a fumble, unless you are a receiver. Now that’s pretty vague. Is it based on how you get the ball or position? Say Mcfadden moves to the slot, catches a pass, is contacted before both feet are on the ground then contact with the ground pops the ball out after both feet are on the ground. Because he is a running back is it then a catch? On an end around can the ground cause a fumble since he is a receiver? And, what constitutes going to the ground? Could it be ground coffee, ground beef or possibly - ground turkey?
H
Would the call have been any different had the WR been on the 40 yardline instead of in the end zone? Or, do you think McDaniels would have even red flagged the TD call on his own?
Here are my keys to beating KC:
1) Take the FG. No handing the ball off to your placekicker on a fake.
2) Maintain an aggressive D for 60 minutes (that’s only 30 minutes of actual D playing time). Hopefully, the same defense shows up that played the first 3/4 of the Chargers game.
3) Run! Run! Run! Ball control, with a mixture of mostly runs and some short passes. But don’t forget Zach Miller down the middle.
4) Fair catch every punt. Due to injury, we are without any experienced PR or KR. This is a huge disadvantage.
For those (anon) that are on JaMarcus Russell and say he’s a bust because of Monday’s game, give me a f’in break. Show me one Raider QB in the past six years (from the likes of Brooks, Walter, Tui, Culpepper, McCown, et al) that has been consistently successful.
The Raiders need to get better as a team. Russell is just one piece of that puzzle. He probably has more raw athleticism and talent than any QB in the league. Let’s give him more than 1 game into his second season as starter.
Uh oh, I've been thinking.
What if a receiver catches a ball in the field of play (not in the end zone), and contacted by another player. His second foot comes down then he struggles to break the hold taking 2.3 baby steps in the process before going down. Can the ground cause a fumble in that case, or would he have needed to complete that third step?
Mortensen also said this call is made all the time. Ok, have NFL live dig up the video and show us. Also, show where it has been ruled a reception. Think that will happen? If I see flying donkeys I'll run back inside and turn on the TV.
H
Javon Walker will be active for the game Sunday. It's currently unclear, but indications are he will return kicks or punts because of the injuries to Nick Miller and Higgins.
Use him as a receiver at somepoint I say.
It's also rumored DB Chris McAlister has or is about to sign.
Don't know what to make of that just yet.
Warren Sapp is at it again. I didn't read it but the heading said it all. So, here's what I have to say.
In the last 25 years the signing of Warren Sapp was one of the worse decisions Al Davis has made. It took good money away from other FA's that might have actually contributed to the team. It is my opinion his selfish attitude contributed mightily to our downfall.
He's a constant motor mouth, not good in the locker room and is one of the most selfish players in history. The only thing that mattered to him was his stats.
When the Suckaneers would bomb in the playoffs, he would point to his stats and say "don't look at me." Derrick Brooks was a class act and was the heart and soul of that defense, contrary to anything Sapp says.
During his tenure was when the locker room was in it's greatest turmoil. As Leroy Jethro Gibbs would say, "It's not a coincidence"
H
H,
doesn't ed hakuli remind you of one of those old wrestling ref's ?
you just know he's going to jump in at some point and steal the victory from the true winner.
of course every raider game has a bunch of wanna be wrestling ref's on hand.
great image NFL. you should be proud.
You guys are missing the two key points I've mentioned a few times.
1: The ground can not cause a fumble, but the ground CAN cause an incomplete pass.
2: You have to complete the pass in order to gain posession, and the rules that govern going to the ground during a catch say he didn't catch it.
Now I'm just saying this is how I understand the rules from the few pits of quote from the rulebook, and quotes from interviewed officials.
I never put any stock in what the guys in the booth say during the game, I've watched several games where the anouncers bitch and moan about something that was clearly not.
I take that back. The guys doing the first game Monday I take some stock in. Jaws and Chucky can spew some knowledge. Get rid of Toriko and put Madden in the middle and they would have a crew.
I digress. So take another look at some replays (nfl total access replayed today may still have the interview with the head zebra and replays, and it's the best explaination of the play and the rule I've probably heard (i.e., jives with what I think I know about the rules).
The NFL should post that rulebook every year as soon as it's updated for the upcoming season.
I'm sure the zebras would love that.
-moshhbucket
Chris McAlister
Born in Pasadena, his myspace page says he's from Oakland.
I doubt he has as good a head on his shoulders for safety as Rod had, but 10yr vet in the back calling plays and getting people setup is what we need.
Like the Seymour deal, adding guys at/near the TOP of the depth chart helps across the board.
Sure a killer tackle or guard would be nice, but if we have McAllister in the outfield, maybe the don't hit us right up the middle at the end of the game?
-moshbucket
Raider00,
Good point. I haven’t seen wrestling in probably 30 years, but your analogy is right on. I figure for the theatric quality they haven’t changed. My grandmother used to think that stuff was real.
Moshbucket,
I understand. But, we just want to know how long you have to have control of the ball before the ground can’t incomplete it (excellent grammar there). And, at what point are you down by contact? I contend when your butt hits the ground and an opposing player is in contact with you, you are down and the play is over. I’m still looking for that rule so any help from anyone would be appreciated.
H
Cable pointed out the obvious holes in the Ref's reasoning. First off, just because there is contact with a defender doesn't mean the receiver is going down. In many instances there are touchdowns without the receiver ever entering the end zone (when they reach out to make the ball cross the plain at the pylon).
Murphy, by rule, had possession of the ball at the time he was hit by the defender. Possession in the end zone is a touchdown, by rule.
The refs are using a very selective interpretation as an excuse for an obvious bad call. The exact same play occurred in the NE/Buff game earlier in the night, and it was called the other way.
So what the NFL is saying is: "It's a touchdown for NE but not for Oakland." That, my friends, is what you call "bias."
Mosh, you made me think about something, and this is somewhat off-topic, but Jaws and Gru are both ex-football guys and what you would call "color" and "analysis," as would Madden be.
Where's your play-by-play?
We can find all kinds of color and analysis guys from the ranks of the ex-coaches and ex-players, but where do we find the PBP guys? There's not just a whole lot who are worth a flip.
One is Al Michaels. I can't stand his ego and his tirade tendencies, but the dude has few equals as a PBP guy. Pat Summerall was another.
Who do you pick as a PBP man to put between Jaws and Gru?
JMHSO
---Jeff
H,
You are down by contact when any part of your body touches the ground other than your feet or hands. Obviously the defender has to touch you.
Blanda,
I'll say it again, you do not have possession of the ball until you completed the pass. It doesn't matter that in cronological order the 'catch/feet down' happend before the go to the ground/drop the ball.
It's irrelevent what determines the man going to the ground on the catch, he CLEARLY went to the ground during the catch.
As far as 'when' or 'how long' he has to hold onto it, well that's why we're here, because it's not specific. It's kind of like you always used to hear the guy had to 'make a football move' after catching it before the ball comes out to determine if it's incomplete or a fumble.
All they have to do is reword it to say he has to maintain posession on the ground and get up with the ball. Obvioussly if you're laying on your back and hold the ball up, then flick the ball to the ref that would count as getting up
I believe it years ago it used to be incomplete if the ball touched the ground at all, but now they allow the ball to touch the ground, as long as the reviever has tight hold on the ball.
When Murph first hit the ground, the ball shifted some, but he still had control. If he gets up clean it's a catch. But as he's getting up and pulling the ball out from under himself, it squirts out, rolls back hits the back of his leg, and rolls right back into his hand.
I'm about to watch the game video again real quick, because you RARELY see replays in full speed (I think thats one of the worst parts of telecasts, but that's another rant). Super-slo-mo is nice, Take out one superslowmo a minute, and they could run 5 fullspeed angles.
Anyway, I'm done unless someone asks a question I can answer :-)
On to KC.
-moshbucket
"Comcast SportsNet Bay Area has learned the Raiders will sign former Ravens cornerback Chris McAlister. McAlister may play on Sunday in Kansas City."
fingers crossed.
-moshbucket
"Comcast SportsNet Bay Area has learned the Raiders will sign former Ravens cornerback Chris McAlister. McAlister may play on Sunday in Kansas City."
fingers crossed.
-moshbucket
AR,
Well, Madden is done with casting, but if he weren't, I'd bring him in and shift Chucky to playbyplay. Very few playbyplay guys they put on these national games cut the mustard if you ask me. Maybe they should look at some of the radio guys.
Toriko is one of the must mind-numbingly boring playbyplay guy I've ever heard. Worse than the other gumble even.
I'm spoiled with good anouncing watching almost every celtics game for the last 8 or 10 years.
-moshbucket
PS: On similiar note, Alabama football radio no longer has Snake as the color man. He was AWSOME!!!
I remember one where LB clocked some guy and snake goes "That guy 'll put you on a soup diet!"
AR,
Well, Madden is done with casting, but if he weren't, I'd bring him in and shift Chucky to playbyplay. Very few playbyplay guys they put on these national games cut the mustard if you ask me. Maybe they should look at some of the radio guys.
Toriko is one of the must mind-numbingly boring playbyplay guy I've ever heard. Worse than the other gumble even.
I'm spoiled with good anouncing watching almost every celtics game for the last 8 or 10 years.
-moshbucket
PS: On similiar note, Alabama football radio no longer has Snake as the color man. He was AWSOME!!!
I remember one where LB clocked some guy and snake goes "That guy 'll put you on a soup diet!"
not sure how it double posted?
sorry
Mosh, do you think Chucky could even *do* PBP? That's a skill that takes a while to develop. Granted, Gru's got some training from his college days, but you don't cultivate that overnight.
I used to work in radio part-time, and trust me, it's nowhere *near* as easy as the good ones make it look.
It'd be interesting to see, anyway.
BTW, I think Greg Papa does out-freeking-STANDING work as PBP. I don't know that you put him on MNF, though. He could do the job, but does he fit between Jaws and Gru?
JMHSO
---Jeff
Mosh - still the fact is that the refs called the same play in favor of NE. However, the NFL is not saying they got it wrong for NE. They are insisting that the play was called correctly in both instances. So that means that the same rule comes down differently depending on the team involved.
Bama7
H, all I can say is Steve Young knows a hell of a lot more than you or i about football and he commented negatively on the scheme we were running. Young was a QB. A good QB... he saw something that others have speculated about for quite some time. Something that we have seen all of our DC's run over and over. Telling.
Raider Nate 75: you say other teams rush 4... yeah... and that is where the similarity with us ends. There's much more to it than that.
Young said it... came right out and said it was an antiquated scheme. On a good day, when the team is fired up, the scheme can work for awhile... but as seen ad nauseam over the last several years it is a defense that can be beaten soundly by a good qb or OC. It relies on superior talent all over the defense and we do not have that. We'll run it better with Ellis & Seymour, but when they get tired and pissed off, we'll probably go back to making hero's out of offensive players that we've never heard of.
That defense is known for making all-pros out of the Eddie Royals of the world and other such nfl no-names.
Mosh, here's a question I don't think has been answered: when did the refs rule touchdown? If they ruled early, like around when his feet came down, then the play should be dead at that point. Nothing after it would be reviewable, you'd think. But if they called a touchdown after Murphy started getting up, I'd say that it's all reviewable, right?
Not a TD? Part of the problem with the NFL is they never publish the current NFL rule book. Nobody can find it on line or anywhere else. There's a reason behind that. So fans can't argue with the refs.
However, I'm told that the rule states that the receiver must maintain possession until the "completion of the play." If that is indeed the language used, it means that if a player catches the ball outside of the end zone, he must indeed hold on to it until he is brought down by the tackle.
But the end zone is a different animal. The play is completed when the player has possession of the ball in the end zone, whether he's brought down or not. Possession is established when he has control of the football and both feet touch down. I got the "completion of the play" language from the NFL website.
IMHO, the difference between a below average Raiders D and an above average Raiders D is how the LBs are deployed.
When we have the LBs in the box, aggressively moving forward, our defense is dictating the tempo and terms of the action.
When we have LBs backpedaling and/or lining up too far from the LOS, it is a passive, prevent mentality.
Food 4 Thought ...
Why not stick Asomugha on Bowe for the majority of 60 minutes?
Take away Bowe and force Cassell/Croyle to go to the other marginal WRs.
>>>
Not a TD? Part of the problem with the NFL is they never publish the current NFL rule book. Nobody can find it on line or anywhere else. There's a reason behind that. So fans can't argue with the refs.
>>>
This is a conspiracy in itself... the NFL purposely doesn't want its fans access to their rules. Why? Because they know they have shitty refs and their rules sometimes make no sense.
Bottom line for me on this issue is I am sick to death of the refs playing god in the replay booth when there is supposed to be INDISPUTABLE evidence to overturn a play. How hard can this be? If you think there is going to be a dispute about it later, don't frigging overturn it?
If the call on the field was incomplete Monday night.. I would kind of scratch my head, but would agree with it... it was a weird play. He had control even after he hit the ground but it popped out later (perhaps as he was getting up)... how do you define "completing the play?"
Whichever way the play was called on the field should have been the way the replay should have ruled.
End of story.
>>>
"Comcast SportsNet Bay Area has learned the Raiders will sign former Ravens cornerback Chris McAlister. McAlister may play on Sunday in Kansas City."
fingers crossed.
-moshbucket
>>>
Anything to get Routt off the field.
Plus more depth at safety?
I am in.
>>>
In the last 25 years the signing of Warren Sapp was one of the worse decisions Al Davis has made.
>>>
Disagree.
Moss was worse.
Sapp at least played well at times.
No way a guy that GIVES UP as the captain of the team should be excusable.
The worst example of a pro athlete I can think of.
Play hard when times are good... quit when not.
Fuck him.
Sapp's problem is he never shuts up (good or bad). I guess that's why he's on TV now.
Excerpts from J-Mac:
“Tom Cable called it a “prevent mode,” but defensive coordinator John Marshall said the final drive in a 24-20 loss to the San Diego Chargers was not a “prevent” defense.” (Sound familiar? This is what help perpetuate a rift between Kiffin and SOB. Let's hope Cable has more say than Kiffin.)
“Hell, it’s on me,” Marshall said. “They needed to have a better understanding of what the situation was.” (What? Does he mean the situation that occurs in about 10-14 games a season?)
“Marshall said the Raiders called five blitzes against San Diego.” (FIVE??)
“Given a do-over, Marshall said he wouldn’t be of a mind to dial up a few blitzes on San Diego’s last drive.” (Let’s hope he takes that to heart.)
“Asomugha said the touchdown surrendered to Vincent Jackson came with a good fake and a back-shoulder fade, noting, “We thought Stan (Stanford Routt) was going to get a hand on it, I guess it was just outside of him.” (Routt seemed to short-arm his defense of that pass, because he looked like he was in the perfect position to bat it down.)
Moshbucket,
Snake did some NFL games for CBS and was great, but the big wigs didn’t like his accent. As for Play-by-Play, I say we clone Curt Gowdy and Charlie Jones, Dick Enberg was OK, but my personal favorite was Charlie Jones. No signature catch phrases just call the game and make you feel like you are there. Back then I actually enjoyed listening.
Just my no longer humble stinking opinion, but the best booth currently is Jim Nantz and Phil Simms. No over analysis by Simms. They should make the three man booth illegal, they never shut up and over analyze everything.
The second team was actually better than the first team on Monday.
Bama,
I agree, Steve Young knows a hell of a lot more than you or I, but you are cherry picking. He also commented positively a lot, especially about gap coverage and how it was stringing out the run. I watched a second time. He also said after leaving the meeting with Cable he was ready to drink some “Kool Aid”.
And, after Golic (Brother of Bob), got the supposed definitive explanation from the refs, he said (paraphrasing) the possession was still “subjective” and it still could have “gone either way”. He said both negative and positive things. He was critical of our “prevent” defense. But, he was more positive than negative.
“That defense is known for making all-pros out of the Eddie Royals of the world and other such nfl no-names.”
That was last year under SOB, let it go. Relax and lets see what happens the next few weeks. Then we will know, it’s only one game. And every great or very good defense has superior talent on it. It takes talent and coaching. Like Madden said, he felt like had been given the keys to a Cadillac.
One last whine on the play. While watching the replay I paid attention to the timer on my DVR. One of Young’s points is he saw nothing definitive to overturn. I think the term is it must be “Clear and Indisputable” evidence to overturn. Well from the time they announced they were going to review until the announcement around four minutes elapsed. If it was clear and indisputable it should take one minute, two tops. You shouldn't be taking time to look up applicable rules.
Gary,
I said “one” of the worse. I didn’t want Sapp or Moss. Sapp lost weight and got in good shape because he was “disted” by the Pro Bowl, not to help the team. It was all he talked about. He should have made the Pro Bowl, not we got to get better as a team so I’ve got to set the right example.
Blanda,
If your “down by contact” is true, Murphy was down by contact when his butt hit the ground. The back of his knee was also on the ground.
I didn’t see the whole Patsie game, so I didn’t see the catch you are referring to. I’ll see if I can find it on the web somewhere.
H
Blanda,
Maybe Cable was referring to a Sunday game. The only TD for the Patsies not on the highlight reel was a one yard TD run. I didn’t see one similar, unless there was a different angle somewhere they weren’t showing.
NYRaider,
In watching the replay Routt hardly left his feet. It didn’t appear to be a full hearted effort for whatever reason. Maybe he just didn’t see the ball in time; he’s the only one who knows for sure.
Also, on the next to last Dolts drive, we were actually playing some pretty good defense except for one play where two LB’s slipped and one of them fell down allowing SD to convert a third an long. We were playing tight and passing out some hard licks. The Dolts earned that TD. The last drive was a whole different story.
As for the blitzes, the Dolts seemed to be picking them up fairly well. We need to work on disguising them a little better. Like I said, Monday was step one.
H
Bama7
NY Raider, you left out this one from JMac:
"Marshall said the Raiders called five blitzes against San Diego. One was negated by penalty and two came on San Diego running plays. He admitted he’s not much of “pressure” coordinator, anyway, just like every other coordinator who has worked for Al Davis."
It's the same defense every year. It's the same excuses and comments every year.
This year we at least have to REAL defensive ends. If we get our safties in the right positions and then add an impact LB we could win with Al's scheme... not win it all, but be a contender. The scheme calls for superior talent all over... something we have not had in a long time on D.
Comcast reports that the "source" saying the Raiders are after McAllitster is Jarrod Cooper; who threw Huff and Routt under the bus, saying of Routt, "I love the guy, but he can't cover."
WOW! No bitter grapes from this guy. Routt was the guy who beat out Cooper (and eventually Buchanon) for that spot; and got them both traded. So if he couldn't cover, how did he beat you for the #3 CB spot?
I think the guy can cover, is he a #2 CB? No, he's a great nickel CB.
B7:
77 rushing yards. I don't care what you think about the scheme, that is NOT the same D as last year (maybe the same D scheme).
BP:
Doesn't matter if the line judge ruled touchdown, becaue he doesn't have a wistle. Breaking the plane, down by contack, possession, ...they are all mute if the RECEPTION IS NOT MADE. And you have to extend your control of the ball through going to the ground and getting up.
I hate to see my nation crying wolf of the refs on this one, because it just makes us look stupid. It's like what they call the 'birthers' raising hell about Obama not releasing his full form birth certificate. Obama WON"T releasee it even if he can, because the 'birthers' do more harm than good for the Right. Not going to say if I'm right or left, just putting that out there as an analogy.
As far as the NE game, I don't have that on tivo so I can't speek to that. If it was the same play, with the same available camera angles and they called it the other way... well, then we have a sereous problem with the ref's.
I'll see if I can track that play down, but anything we find inthe internet is going to be so grainy you can't see shit anyway.
I canceled my league pass this year, so unless the game is telivised on regular TV, no more great replay analysis by me.
Bush and Miller are in on my fantasy team this weekend. I've got Murph at the bottom of my bench. And if Pittsburge had thier buy this week, I probably would run the Raiders D.
-moshbucket
About the extra vanilla D this week. Here are two reasons I think it will be less and less vanilla as the season goes on:
1: Spent MUCH time in camp going over the mental side of it, focusing on basics, relearning football as coach put it. So get the basics right first (I think we did that except for a couple of lapses at the end of the game.
2: We shrunk the playbook so we could use Seymour alot more in this game.
One thing that is different now is we are doing run fits. Sapp said we never did them the whole time he was in oakland. I guess this goes back to relearning.
-moshbucket
You’re right Bama, absolutely nothing has changed. What would be great is if we should bring SOB back. Then we could be ranked 32nd in the league in rush defense like Cleveland is instead of 12th. And we could be ranked 31st in total defense instead of 19th.
In fact, let’s bring Kiffin back so players can just go through the motions instead of playing with the passion and effort we saw Monday. Yep, I’m really longing for the good old days of ’07 and early ’08 when LT and Sproles made us look like a division II college team and we were giving up 160 or more a game like Cleveland still is.
When Cable took over the problems on this team would fill a Clancy novel. At least now he’s got them down to a pocket dictionary.
H
bama7
H, go back a year or two so we can read all your praise on sob. hell kiff tried to get rid of him and you were up in arms.
we'll see how muvh love you have for cable when he's gone.
I just want a gm.
Bama,
I soured on SOB last year. I did give him the benefit of the doubt because of our abysmal offensive woes.
And, I'm willing to give this HC and his staff a chance. I've laid out where I was wrong on several occasions.
But, I'm not going to throw these guys under the bus based on 2 minutes and 40 seconds of the first game with a guy on the DL who only had a walk through before suiting up. Especially if they made Take smile.
H
One more thing.
Bama,
On Monday there was hitting, physical toughness, proper tackling and players flying to the ball. All things you have complained about the last several years. And what do we hear? "Nothing has changed."
H
And another one.
I've been lobbying for us to use our first round draft choice on a D-Lineman who would draw double teams and occupy blockers.
Well, I got may wish. Now we'll find out if it pays off.
H
When Sapp was brought in, he was brought in primarily for the leadership he would bring to the defensive unit. That leadership never showed up. Sapp also displayed a complete inability to play in the 3-4.
Seymour is considered to be outstanding in both the 3-4 and the 4-3 (but almost unstopable in the 4-3). The first thing Seymour did when he showed up is display leadership. Along with the acquisition of Ellis, we can now shift d-linemen up and down the line (which, yes, is an Al Davis design). Seymour without much practice with the unit played up and down the line, inside and outside, confusing the offensive line.
One of the things I keep hearing around here is that the preferred Davis defense requires excellent players on every defensive unit. Looks to me like we're getting there. This is the product of Davis' greater involvement during the off season.
The problem with Davis over the last several years has not been Davis' involvement as GM, it was the lack of it as I've said many times. I think when this defense begins to come together as the season progresses, we're really going to see something.
Bama7
H, sounds good.
Blanda... we have conflicting views of the situation. I respect Al and think he is one of the giants in NFL history but has consistently had some bad franchise issues for a long time now.
His defensive scheme can only work if the talent is superior all over the field. Right now we're good but not great in the secondary... improved greatly to a B on the DL... but have major issues still at the LB area. The major issues at LB render a decent secondary, vulnerable.
So we lack the manpower to run the D our HQ prefers. Good news for us is we play a lot of weak offenses this year. That'll help.
Routt is not a good player...he needs to be replaced. His slow cut on the ball and lame effort to knock it down was horrific on Monday..he's been getting burned since the day he showed up.
Murphy's touchdown was a catch, play with the rules or whatever, the play was a catch. HE HAD CONTROL while in the air, on his feet and when his body hit the ground. It was refs trying to teach the rookie a lesson, it's all it was.....screw the refs and league officials, they are full of shit.
JONES
Mosh:
Yes, I saw the Ben Watson catch and Murphy controlled the ball longer than Watson. It wasn't even questioned by the refs, the announcers didn't say a word. You damn right the refs are screwed, they get their orders and carry them out. Everyone in the stadium knew what the refs were doing, even the Chargers. It doesn't take a genius to figure it out...but you can go on pretending it's all innocent....ahhhh reality, some people will do or say anything to avoid it.
JONES
Jones, this is getting scary. You and I are starting to agree a lot.
While I think point spreads are worthless in the NFL for anything other than to encourage betting, it does provide a measure of how the team is doing against the national perception.
This week, KC is favored by 3 points. In Vegas that means that the teams are perceived to be even, but KC gets 3 points for the home field advantage.
The spread against San Diego was the Chargers plus 10.5. That means that San Diego was considered to be two touchdowns better, minus 3 points for Oakland's home field advantage. As the Raiders lost by only 4 points, that means we are currently 1-0 against the spread (national perception).
No doubt the national perception will change if the Raiders continue with the types of performances they put in last Monday - and if they start winning.
It's no big deal, but it's interesting to watch.
According to Herrera the McAlister rumors are BS. Seems that McAlister was floating the idea to spark interest. Looks like Coop isn't the insider he thought he was.
A couple topic worth noting about the MNF game:
* Our offense did a tremendous job with blitz pick ups. LT Henderson was a stud at neutralizing Merriman w/o help. For the entire game, Merriman had only 1 QB pressure.
* Penalties were not an issue. Sure there were a few pre-snap errors and RT Green, as usual, had some untimely transgressions.
* Overall, the offensive unit did an excellent job of setting up manageable 3rd downs. This was a product of good playcalling by Cable.
I read some quote from Cable that said when Shilens returns to the lineup that DHB would stay on the field instead of Murphy. His reasoning was that DHB plays 1 side of the field. Excuse me? I hope I read this quote wrong or out of context because Cable needs to put the best, most productive WRs on the field. The difference in speed between DHB & Murphy is miniscule. The difference in route running, confidence, and hands is a mile wide.
>>>
No doubt the national perception will change if the Raiders continue with the types of performances they put in last Monday - and if they start winning.
It's no big deal, but it's interesting to watch.
>>>
More interesting to bet on.
I've lost a lot of money betting my heart on the Raiders over the last few years... but this is my lock of the week (last week it was Dallas).
Unless KC has an extraordinary effort from whichever QB is playing, I don't see any hope for KC.
No way is Larry Johnson killing us running if SD couldn't.
Their defense is a train wreck while ours is coming together.
If not for the negative press lately on the Raiders being a laughing stock... this game should be favored by the Raiders.
>>
It's the same defense every year. It's the same excuses and comments every year.
>>>
JFC... if you didn't notice the difference in tackling and gap assignments from ANY of the years SOB was coach, I have to wonder if you even watched the game.
Cmon bro...
Folks, every game is different. There is no easy game between division rivals regardless of our perceptions of these teams.
Teams know they can just sit back and wait for the Raiders to beat themselves.
While I like what I saw last week, I haven't seen anything to truly change that perception. The Raiders D intentionally fell out of their game plan and laid an egg on the game-winning drive.
I sat front row in Buffalo last year and watched Rob Ryan orchestrate basically the same stupidity which netted the same disastrous results.
To Marshall's credit, he did continue to rush four, while SOB dropped lineman back into coverage.
However, until we stop backpedaling DL and LBs when we have a lead late in games, we can expect teams will continue to have success against us when the game is on the line.
For Russell critics, from Steve Corkran:
(Former teammate WR Dwayne) Bowe said Russell has what it takes to silence the critics and be the player the Raiders envisioned when they rewarded him with a contract that pays him $32 million guaranteed.
To do so, Russell needs to assert himself the way he did at LSU, Bowe said.
"You have to take into consideration to take the show yourself, and he just feels like he's young and he's got a lot of older guys in front of him that's kind of mentoring him," Bowe said. "But I said, 'You're the quarterback on that team; you're going to be the franchise player. You need to be the franchise.'"
Bowe said Russell arrived at LSU as a laid-back guy who took awhile to find his way as a leader. Once he felt comfortable in that role, he became more vocal, called extra meetings and spent additional time breaking down videotape at his house.
"He said he's going to start that up," Bowe said of Russell.
Raiders coach Tom Cable said Bowe's assessment is spot on.
---------
The reason the Raiders were right to get rid of a backup QB like Garcia is so that every time your young starter struggles you don't have to hear the fans whine about replacing him.
As far as I can tell, our running backs ran the ball 21 times in the first half, and 8 times in the second half...while our QB was misfiring all over the place. In the first half, we were averaging 4.9 yards per rush.
Am I missing something? Why would you abandon the run when it was working, and when it's your core offensive strength?
Snakedoc3840 kansas city we should win it,s been a long time that i can hold my head up high and say that is my team
RT: Good point. Running the ball should always be the core foundation & strength of our offense. To go away from this strength in the 2nd half is a real head scratcher.
In KC, I'm expecting a grind it out, conservative approach to playcalling where we run the ball 40 times. Bush & McFadden complement each other perfectly.
It just boggles my mind that you have a whole group of offensive coaches that loses sight of McFadden and Bush while watching Russell throw dead geese in a tight game.
Honestly, I think coaching, more than anything, lost us that game.
Based on MNF and the current landscape of the AFC West, I think it is a wide open race.
Just look at the Chargers:
NT Jamal Williams is out for the year on IR
C Hardwick, G Vasquez, RB LT are all dinged up.
The loss of Williams to the Chargers D will have a major negative impact on the team. This guy, next to Rivers, is the person they could least afford to lose. He is the foundation to their 3-4 D.
RT - I agree. The players were primed for the win, but weren't given the direction they needed to finish the game. Greater concentration on running the ball, and LBs staying in the box on D.
After the way we ran the ball against KC last year (they knew it and couldn't do a thing about it), I expect a full dose of McFadden and Bush through the entire game. Russell can just file his nails or something.
Post a Comment
<< Home